China Versus American Military?

World War II American Military
#21

Fracking demonstrates desperation in extracting energy. I doubt it’s a good idea in the environmental and social long term, and maybe the short term given complaints by people in fracking areas.

However, that’s only my opinion, which is as nought compared with the opinion of the Prime Minister of my nation who, as can be seen from his following comments, is a man with unique mastery of science, climatology and economics, not to mention a great vision for the future.

“Coal is good for humanity, coal is good for prosperity, coal is an essential part of our economic future, here in Australia, and right around the world,”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/04/coal-is-the-future-insists-tony-abbott-as-un-calls-for-action-on-climate-change

:confused::confused::confused:

#22

Is this a reference to Mr Abbot ? If so, I suppose we can now refer to him as the “Black Abbot”. [/quote]

#23

Or, with some justification, his occasional title down here as “The Mad Monk”, referencing his days as a failed Catholic seminarian, which explains so much and so little about the troubled man.

#24

First of all, China doesn’t have any willing of attack America. It already owns part of public debt of America. So the growth of China is linked to the growth of USA. At the same time, the large rich USA market is very important for a lot of industrial chinese companies: e.g. chinese Foxconn that produces for USA big IT company a lot of products (iPad and iPhone of Apple, Kindle of Amazon, computer of Dell, HP and so on).

At the same time, China is conducting a non-violent acts of aggression in order to penetrate USA most important military and civilian industries, with cyber warfare because it fears the technology gap that still exists.

I cannot agree with that. USA forces had already begun action in Nord Africa. With some battles, like Kasserine, high officials had learned differences between manuals and operations in real world. USA had advantages in terms of sheer numbers for sure, but also it deployed some elite unit like Paratroopers and Rangers on the field. The air superiority of USAF was based upon good training and technologically advanced airplanes.

#25

Very odd post so I will reply to the WW2 part

#26

This is a china man troll.
No american even flipped youth of today would say this…

show that even better trained men cant hold of wave of men charging at you
You could say that is almost the popular view of the UN forces against the NK and Chinese forces in Korea, not Normandy
Exactly,…and WHO purports this kind of battle tactics ? right: communist chinamen and north koreans

#27

Wasn’t yamamoto studying in the USA before the war ? and ? did it help him to become LESS imperial japan patriotic and /or peace loving minded ?

God help us , if the likes of “Boxing Day” are swarming our universities and military academies only to return with better equipped knowledge but brimming with nationalistic hatred ?!
(aaaaahhhhhhhhhnother example are our ISIS friends that for the most have “enjoyed” western education , lifestyles and training…)

#28

Research Korean War then go to any store.

I’m just saying back in the day you didn’t have to buy same thing over and over again and feel like you won lottery if it actually worked. It’s more of economic war now and we are flooded with this cheap junk that you couldn’t even sell for scrap because it’s so cheap to start with.

#29

Back on Topic ,

Research the Korean War Original Poster, then thank God you weren’t there because I sure as hell do.

#30

You can’t kill us if you loves us. :slight_smile: Destroy our cheeseburgers, excellent crafts beers, markets for their products, etc.?

It’s not 1940 or so anymore…

#31

No Walmart, or Dollar Stores are included in China’s primary Target Packages, so all is well FDR :slight_smile:

#32

Regarding Yamamoto, he was one of the bright boys of the Imperial Japanese Navy. He was extensively involved in the military end of diplomacy in the interwar period. While he was a loyal (and ambitious) Japanese officer who was willing to do his duty in war with energy and to the best of his considerable abilities. One of his diplomatic posts was as Naval Attaché at the Japanese Embassy to the USA. Rather than confining himself to the protocol goldfish bowl in Washington, he made best use of his opportunity to make an appraisal, not just of America’s actual military capacity at the time (in many respects not impressive) but also of its economic/military potential. This left him under no illusions about the difficulties that Japan would face in a war against the USA. After Pearl Harbour, he is recorded as commenting, “I can run wild in the Pacific for one year, maybe two. After that, we will face great difficulties. Nobody who has seen the oilfields of Texas, or the automobile factories of Detroit, can doubt this.”. Yet, when asked why, if he held views like this, he was willing to take part in the prosecution of Japan’s war, he is said to have replied, “I am the sword of my Emperor.”. A point of view not uncommon among senior Japanese officers, not least those with diplomatic backgrounds who had an unusually clear view of the capacities of their enemies. Best regards, JR.

#33

There are varying versions of the exact quote and when it was made, but:

  1. The most common version is that Yamamoto said he could run wild for six months, perhaps a year, from the commencement of the proposed hostilities.

  2. It preceded Japan’s Pacific War by at least some months when expressed in response to the proposed war, or perhaps even earlier on some less reliable accounts. Whichever, it demonstrated an astute appreciation of Japan’s inability to wage a sustained war against, primarily, the USA.

  3. It was also correct, as the turning point against Japan was the Battle of Midway, which was six months after Japan commenced its Pacific War and which damaged the IJN and in particular the IJN’s carriers and carrier pilots to an extent from which the IJN never recovered, while the Americans went on to build a much greater carrier force; many more carrier planes; and to train many more carrier plane pilots much more quickly than the IJN managed by holding largely to its pre-war training program.

#34

Actually, they are, and they have already been conquered and occupied.

Try finding much there that ain’t made in China.

Double irony in the champions of low wage, anti-union, anti-worker capitalism such as Wal Mart buying most of their goods from the Chinese communist champions of the workers running a laissez faire capitalist state which makes the 19th century American robber barons look like the benefactors of a charitable state.

#35

RS* - can’t disagree with you regarding Yamamoto’s statement of his views on this subject. It does make sense that it should be pre-Pearl Harbour, and there must be some uncertainty as to its precise content. It would not be particularly surprising if Yamamoto overestimated Japan’s ability to maintain an active war in terms of time. One thing that is pretty clear, I think, is that he (and he was not alone) had reservations about Japan’s ability to sustain a war against the US to victory. Diplomatic assessments of economic capacity do (even now) tend to be somewhat imprecise, and lacking in precise quantification. Nonetheless, I think that he was pretty astute, and feared the final outcome.

On the “Walmart Question” - I remember seeing an interview that some western film crew made with a young Chinese woman, working in one of their "cp factories". She was surrounded with Christmas decorations - plastic Santas and the like - bound for export to the West. Asked whether she knew what the cp she was making was all about, she said she had no idea. She only hoped that the foreigners would keep on buying it, so that she and her friends would have a job. So far, so good … JR.

#36

He certainly wasn’t alone. Admiral Nagumo, who commanded the fleet which attacked Pearl Harbor, predicted “The success of our surprise attack on Pearl Harbor will prove to be the Waterloo of the war to follow.” (Given that Pearl Harbor was the opening attack in nearly four years of war and that Waterloo was the decisive end to Napoleon’s wars, that comment is somewhat difficult to understand, although its import is clear enough. Maybe it lost something in translation.)

Yamamoto said in September 1941: “It is a mistake to regard Americans as luxury loving and weak. I can tell you that they are full of spirit, adventure, fight and justice. Remember that American industry is much more developed than ours and - unlike us - they have all oil they want. Japan cannot vanquish the United states. Therefore we should not fight the United States.”

Source for above quotes is Pacific Fury, Peter Thompson, Random House Australia, 2009, pp. 8-9

He was astute to the point of accurate prophecy.

The Japanese, it must be emphasized, did not seek the total defeat of the United States and had no intention of invading this country. They planned to fight a war of limited objectives and having once secured these objectives to set up a defense in such depth that the United States would find a settlement favorable to Japan an attractive alternative to a long and costly war. To the Japanese leaders this seemed an entirely reasonable view. But there were fallacies in this concept which Admiral Yamamoto had pointed out when he wrote that it would not be enough “to take Guam and the Philippines, not even Hawaii and San Francisco.” To gain victory, he warned his countrymen, they would have “to march into Washington and sign the treaty in the White House.” [49] Here was a lesson about limited wars that went unheeded then and is still often neglected.
(My emphasis, to underline the distressing failure of various belligerents around the world, and the USA in particular, to heed Yamamoto’s wisdom and the comment of the US WWII official history authors close to sixty years ago, preceding predictable failures in limited wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, among others.)
http://www.history.army.mil/books/70-7_04.htm

Having made the grievous mistake of disposing of almost all of my many books some years ago, I can’t lay my hands on a published source for the “run wild for six months” quote.

From imperfect memory, I think Yamamoto made recorded comments to the same effect on several occasions, including at senior government level when proposals for war were being considered, and or in response to the decision to go to war, and similar comments to other senior naval officers and other senior people in government.